Rivers v. Amato, 2003 ME 87

Summary

The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine affirmed summary judgment for the property owner in a dispute over a real estate commission. The court held that the listing agreement required the property to be sold, conveyed, exchanged, or otherwise transferred within the six-month extension period, and that no commission was due because the prospective buyer canceled the purchase and sale agreement. The court also rejected the plaintiffs’ quantum meruit claim.

Holdings

1. The Rivers were not entitled to a commission because the buyer's offer occurred during the six-month extension period, when the agreement required an actual sale, conveyance, exchange, or other transfer of the property, and no such transfer occurred.
2. The Rivers were not entitled to recover a commission on a quantum meruit theory because they failed to satisfy the requirements of the listing agreement, making an expectation of compensation unreasonable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Rivers were entitled to a commission under the listing agreement when the buyer was produced during the six-month extension period but the property was never sold, conveyed, exchanged, or otherwise transferred.
2. Whether the Rivers were entitled to compensation under quantum meruit despite not satisfying the listing agreement's express conditions.

Disposition

affirmed